Monday, August 18, 2014

Who to Support in Ferguson, Missouri?

As an American, I am appalled that law enforcement in this nation that once celebrated freedom is now a branch of the military with weapons and equipment that our men on the front lines would love to have the budget for.  Our Department of Homeland Security buys more small arms ammunition than several of the world’s largest armies.  I feel sick at heart when I see our police forces employing tactics our troops on the front lines in war would be sent to prison for.

That said, a police officer, unlike a private citizen, is not allowed to simply walk away from a situation that places citizens at risk of violent crimes.  I can put my family in a car and leave, but a police officer is duty bound to protect the residents in a neighborhood even (perhaps especially) when there are hundreds of violent protestors in the street.  Police can stand down in cases where their continued presence increases the risk to bystanders, but that is not possible when rioters are looting businesses and destroying neighborhoods.

I do not like seeing police wearing camouflage fatigues and masks pulled up over their faces (I simply cannot believe there are that many police officers in the world infiltrating drug gangs and thus need to protect their identities).  I do want them wearing whatever protective gear gives them the best chance of going home at the end of shift.  (Remember, an officer also has a duty to his or her family to try to survive and continue to provide for them.) I dislike the armored personnel carriers and I see no utility for the AR-15 rifles if they are full-auto or selective fire, which they are often equipped with.  Even if a dozen bad guys charge an officer out of a crowd, he must NEVER fire back toward the crowd (many of whom do not represent an immediate threat) in order to stop the few who are charging.

By the same token, the people who are rioting, looting and destroying businesses could not be more in the wrong.  Who are they protesting against? The small business owner they are robbing? The neighbors who are employed at the business and will lose their jobs when the employer decides not to reopen? This is a terrible thing to see and I can see no justification for it.

I think it is obvious that the police, whether local, state, or federal are not equipped to handle a large uprising of senseless violence except with a greater force of violence.  The police will always be outnumbered and the only card they can play is bigger weapons.  It doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to see where that ends up.  In between confrontations, the officials stage “Kum Bah Yah” moments of rhetoric.  Why can’t we all just get along? All levels of our government fail repeatedly at this on our own soil, with people who grew up in the American culture.

I am not advocating armed vigilantes hunting down bad guys and stringing them up from lamp posts, but Ferguson is showing one thing pretty plainly.  Armed United States citizens protecting their own property by standing guard over it armed with weapons is an effective deterrent.  So far nobody has gotten hurt by this in Ferguson.  The mere presence of someone who is willing and able to exact a price from those who would steal or destroy what they have built has been sufficient deterrent.

If the left was correct about the presence of firearms being hazardous, shouldn’t there be bodies stacked like cordwood in front of those businesses? It is just something to think about.

2 comments:

  1. "Even if a dozen bad guys charge an officer out of a crowd, he must NEVER fire back toward the crowd (many of whom do not represent an immediate threat) in order to stop the few who are charging. "

    That is the only part of the essay I disagree with... especially the "NEVER" aspect.

    Too many scenarios possible to discuss all but a cop has to protect himself even if innocents are placed at risk. Attempts to minimize collateral damage is a must, of course. However, it is the thug's choice to place a public protector at risk.

    There are a lot of good points in the essay.

    I wonder what will be the spark igniting Revolutionary War Two?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Perhaps things are different now. I hope not. When I was in the Coast Guard in the early 1980's our use of force policies would have absolutely forbidden it. My understanding of the current Rules of Engagement for our armed forces in combat forbid firing in a direction that "might" put non-combatants at risk. I would hope our police officers are required to use at least as much restraint as our young men and women in combat missions.

    ReplyDelete